It has no means of being a replacement currency.
A 'proper' currency should be issued by our US Treasury, and only get issued as payment for labor that has already been completed (i.e. - building a bridge). It should not reflect as debt (ownership of the future labor of others) on the opposite side of the balance sheet.
Also, a 'proper' currency must have a way of reeling in the money supply when it gets too hot. That was supposed to be the realm of taxation, where the US Treasury could then take some of that out of circulation to cool down an economy running too hot.
Bitcoin has absolutely none of that. Even the fact that it has a capped amount is bad - since there's nothing wrong with a money supply increasing in a growing economy - IF...it only grows from labor that's been completed (and not debt).
Bitcoin is the new 'goldbug' hypothesis - but it makes zero economic sense as a monetary mechanism is society.
It's a gamble - inflationary one day - deflationary the next (sometimes in the same day).
Lastly, does anybody REALLY think those who own the debt of this world (the slave masters over us) would allow a new monetary system that wasn't backed by debt? The answer is no.
Its “monetary mechanism” for society is as a decentralized store of wealth, with no borders or governments controlling it.
The true test of a monetary unit is—is it legal tender?
If not—you are on your own....
And all the zeros and ones in the universe won’t help you.
You sound like a Von Mises student. I also oppose artificial monetary growth. Especially debt monetization (printing money).